Chime: base is used only to
resolve the relative URIs not to locate the resource.

<jjc> [[

<jjc> Subject to security
considerations below and local policy as expressed in its
configuration, given a URI I of an information resource IR, and
an XPath node N for a representation of IR, a GRDDL-aware agent
should:

JJC: in the pipeline example if
you have to give a URI it would have to be a default one.

<john-l> [[ the problem is
that it *fails* to define results in terms of representations
]] -- #issue-dbooth-9a

Murray: after three steps in the
pipeline you don't have the URI anymore

<jjc> [[

<jjc> If F and G are GRDDL
results of IR, then the merge [RDF-MT] of F and G is also a
GRDDL result of IR.]

Murray: all information resources
have a URI no URI means it is not an information resource

<chimezie> "" rdf:type
foaf:Person

<chimezie> "" :isTheContextOf
<..rdfStatement URI..>

Fabien: wouldn't reification be another mechanism
too?

Fabien: Although the triples and their reification are
not really linked...

<rreck> i agree with that
statement

Murray: it is important to have
that URI available all along the process

JJC: the base URI can come from a
lot of sources / mechanisms

JJC: too big change of the spec to be made at
this point.

<chimezie> practically
speaking the URI is only valuable for resolving relative URIs,
(empty URI references can be used to make statements about the
containing document, but this is different from making
statements about provenance)

<rreck> chimezie: you mean
the baseURI, correct?

<rreck> otherwise provenance
would be inferred

<chimezie> rreck: i mean the
URI from where the XML concrete syntax was dereferenced
(fetched) from - which sometimes is the same as the BaseURI if
no BaseURI is specified within

Murray: the decision was that we
work on XPath node set ; we should not reopen the issue

JJC: I agree we should not reopen
it.

<chimezie> it seems that he
is motivated both by having a 'complete' rendition (which we
don't compute) and in giving some precedence in a 'default' XML
processing pipeline (which it seems - to me - GRDDL has no
authority to mandate)

Murray: If you want to guarantee
you have the right answer you can run everything yourself (e.g.
xinclude). I can talk to him on the phone. I prefer somebody else to send the formal response.

<jjc> suggested proposal (not
from me) "We resolve not to make changes in response to
DBooth-3, and not to reopen the faithful infoset issue"